Skip Navigation Links
10-04 On Advocating and Funding Either Both Sides of the Abortion Issue or Neither.
Source: Presbytery Sponsor:
Beaver-Butler Presbytery
Committee:
[10-04] Health Issues
Type:General Assembly Full Consideration
Topic:Unassigned
http://www.pc-biz.org/Explorer.aspx?id=1695
ASSEMBLY ACTION
On this Item, the General Assembly, acted as follows:
Answer with Action on another Resolution
Answered with action taken on Item 10-03
Voice Vote
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On this Item, the Health Issues Committee, acted as follows:
Answer with Action on another Resolution
That 10-04 be answered with the action on 10-03
[Counted Vote - Committee]
Affirmative:70
Negative:2
Abstaining:3
Final Text:
RECOMMENDATION

The Presbytery of Beaver-Butler overtures the 218th General Assembly (2008) to

1.   Direct all PC(USA) entities, in both funding and in publications, to reflect balance and equality in advocating both sides of the abortion issue so that any advocacy is in full compliance with our 1992 abortion policy.

2.   Direct the PC(USA) national offices to uphold the 1992 abortion policy in any and all funding allocations, and in all of their communications with both church and society; or to immediately cease funding in support of any one side of this critical issue. (Either of these actions would be in compliance with the 1992 Abortion Policy and would affirm the policy’s statement that the church provide for freedom and exercise of conscience on this matter which so clearly divides us.)
RATIONALE

The 1992 Abortion Policy adopted by the General Assembly states that we as Presbyterians hold both Position A (“pro-life”) and Position B (“pro-choice”) positions. The 1992 General Assembly’s action included adoption of the following recommendations:

B.    We recommend that future publications of the denomination and its ministry units reflect the diversity of positions about problem pregnancies and abortion found herein. …

D.    We recommend that the General Assembly acknowledge the prerogative of Presbyterian entities to participate in ecumenical and interfaith organizations that represent different points of view concerning abortion. We also urge the General Assembly Council and the presbyteries to affirm procedures by which particular churches may be assured that their mission funds will not be used in violation of conscience on this issue. (Minutes, 1992, Part I, pp. 373-74)

However, the only groups that receive funding or produce material or advocate on behalf of the PC(USA) are Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Choice (PARO), the Washington Office, Women’s Ministries, and the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP). All of these organizations produce material and advocate specifically and diligently only for the “pro-choice” position. The following examples are offered:

  • The Washington Office has advocated to Congress on behalf of the PC (USA) in support of all abortions, including late-term abortions.
  • The PC(USA) is a member of Religious Coalition of Reproductive Choice (RCRC). We support them with non-designated money. None of their literature or advocacies, including their 2006 late-term abortion statement, reflects the current 1992 abortion policy.

Thus not only do publications not reflect Position A found in the 1992 Policy (but only Position B), but in addition, the Washington Office, ACSWP, and Women’s Ministries are funded with undesignated funds. This violates the call to see that churches be assured that their mission funds not be used in violation of their conscience on this issue:

Currently, there is no organization funded by the PC(USA) at the denomination level that advocates a pro-life position. This one-sided advocacy is not in compliance with our 1992 abortion policy, thus violating the 1992 policy’s call for the ecumenical and interfaith organizations to “represent different points of view concerning abortion.” While Presbyterian entities have joined and pay dues to RCRC, an entity that supports all abortions, no entity funded by the PC(USA) has joined or pays dues to the National Pro-Life Religious Council.
COMMENT
COMMENT
Advice and Counsel on Item 10-04—From the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP).
The Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) advises that the recommendations of Item 10-04 be answered by the action taken on Item 10-03.
Advice and Counsel on Item 10-04—From the Advocacy Committee for Women’s Concerns (ACWC).
Item 10-04 asks the 218th General Assembly (2008) to direct all PC(USA) entities to reflect balance and equality in both funding and publications when advocating both sides of the abortion issue. This action is requested in order to be in full compliance with the church’s 1992 policy on abortion.

The Advocacy Committee for Women’s Concerns (ACWC) advises this item be disapprovedand refers to its comment on Item 10-03.